Meta-analysis of deep learning approaches for automated coronary artery calcium scoring: Performance and clinical utility AI in CAC scoring: A meta-analysis
Abstract
Introduction Manual Coronary Artery Calcium (CAC) scoring, crucial for assessing coronary artery disease risk, is time-consuming and variable. Deep learning, particularly through Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), promises to automate and enhance the accuracy of CAC scoring, which this study investigates. Methods Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature search across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and IEEE databases from their inception until November 1, 2023, and selected studies that employed deep learning for automated CAC scoring. We then evaluated the quality of these studies by using the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. The main metric for evaluation was Cohen's kappa statistic, indicating an agreement between deep learning models and manual scoring methods. Results A total of 25 studies were included, with a pooled kappa statistic of 83 % (95 % CI of 79 %-87 %), indicating strong agreement between automated and manual CAC scoring. Subgroup analysis revealed performance variations based on imaging modalities and technical specifications. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the reliability of the results. Conclusions Deep learning models, particularly CNNs, have great potential for use in automated CAC scoring applications, potentially enhancing the efficiency and accuracy of risk assessments for coron…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
AI algorithms can automate CAC detection and accurately quantify calcium burden from non-gated CT scans.
“AI algorithms can automate CAC detection and accurately quantify calcium burden,1213 potentially accelerating interpretation and improving reproducibility from non-gated CT scans.”
From Prognostication and clinical opportunities with AI for coronary artery calcium: a scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
More than 60 published and proprietary AI algorithms for CAC detection and scoring on chest imaging have been reviewed in the last 2 years, varying in populations, imaging protocols, training datasets, validation approaches and model architectures.
“More than 60 published and proprietary AI algorithms for CAC detection and scoring on chest imaging (AI-CAC) have been reviewed in the last 2 years,12–15 varying in populations, imaging protocols, training datasets, validation approaches and model architectures.”
From Prognostication and clinical opportunities with AI for coronary artery calcium: a scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
Reviews of AI-CAC generally focused on algorithmic performance rather than clinical implementation.
“Reviews generally focused on algorithmic performance rather than clinical implementation.”
From Prognostication and clinical opportunities with AI for coronary artery calcium: a scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 50 · Cited by 14
- Authors
- Wang, T.-W., Tzeng, Y.-H., Wu, K.-T., Liu, H.-R., Hong, J.-S., Hsu, H.-Y., Fu, H.-N., Lee, Y.-T., Yin, W.-H., & Wu, Y.-T.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Cheng Hsin General Hospital (TW)
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University (TW)
- Corresponding author
- Wu, Kuan-Ting
- Wu, Yu-Te
- ORCID
- Venue
- Computers in Biology and Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024-12
- Volume
- 183
- Pages
- 109295
- ISSN
- 0010-4825 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4403689663
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 9
- FWCI
- 0.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Computers in Biology and Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
- Keywords
- coronary artery calcium scoring, deep learning, convolutional neural networks, coronary artery disease risk assessment, cardiac CT, artificial intelligence in medical imaging, diagnostic accuracy
- MeSH terms
- Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Calcium, Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary Vessels, Humans, Vascular Calcification
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review